Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23

Supreme Court overturns medical negligence finding in Consumer Case: M.A Biviji vs. Sunita & Ors. (2023) INSC 938 (19 October 2023)

/ Consumer Law, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Duty of Care, Medical Law, Medical Malpractice, Medical Negligence

Supreme Court overturns medical negligence finding in Consumer Case: M.A Biviji vs. Sunita & Ors. (2023) INSC 938 (19 October 2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the performance of a Nasotracheal Intubation (NI) procedure, after a bronchoscopy indicated normal airways, constitutes medical negligence, and whether subsequent medical complications can be directly linked to this procedure. CASE TYPE: […]

Supreme Court overturns medical negligence finding in Consumer Case: M.A Biviji vs. Sunita & Ors. (2023) INSC 938 (19 October 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Directs Petitioner to High Court in Insurance Claim Dispute: Universal Sompo vs. Suresh Chand Jain (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 21, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Consumer Protection Act, 2019 with Section 58, Consumer Protection Act, 2019 with Section 67

Supreme Court Directs Petitioner to High Court in Insurance Claim Dispute: Universal Sompo vs. Suresh Chand Jain (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution is maintainable directly against an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) passed in appellate jurisdiction. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name:

Supreme Court Directs Petitioner to High Court in Insurance Claim Dispute: Universal Sompo vs. Suresh Chand Jain (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim: National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Vedic Resorts (2023)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bela M. Trivedi, Consumer Law, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Exclusion Clauses, Insurance Claims, Insurance Law, Judges, Malicious Act

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim: National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Vedic Resorts (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether damage caused by a mob to insured property, after the mob chased individuals who had taken shelter in the property, constitutes a malicious act by the property owner, thereby excluding the claim under an insurance policy. CASE TYPE: Consumer

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim: National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Vedic Resorts (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Revisits Consumer Compensation in Haircut Mishap Case: ITC vs. Aashna Roy (2023)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Consumer Compensation, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Deficiency in Service, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Revisits Consumer Compensation in Haircut Mishap Case: ITC vs. Aashna Roy (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of adequate compensation for deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, specifically concerning claims for mental trauma, loss of income, and pain and suffering. CASE TYPE: Consumer Case Name: ITC Limited vs. Aashna Roy [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Revisits Consumer Compensation in Haircut Mishap Case: ITC vs. Aashna Roy (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Increases Interest on Refund in Consumer Dispute: Ashoka Investment Co. vs. United Towers India (2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Breach of contract, Consumer Dispute, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(d)(i), Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Contract Law, Contract Law with Interest Clause, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Increases Interest on Refund in Consumer Dispute: Ashoka Investment Co. vs. United Towers India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the interest rate awarded by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) was appropriate in a case of delayed possession of property and subsequent cancellation of allotment. CASE TYPE: Consumer Dispute Case Name: M/s. Ashoka

Supreme Court Increases Interest on Refund in Consumer Dispute: Ashoka Investment Co. vs. United Towers India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Medical Negligence Claim in Kidney Transplant Case: Chanda Rani Akhouri vs. M.A. Methusethupathi (2022)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Judges, Medical Negligence, Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994, Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 with Section 14

Supreme Court Dismisses Medical Negligence Claim in Kidney Transplant Case: Chanda Rani Akhouri vs. M.A. Methusethupathi (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether post-operative medical negligence occurred during follow-up care after a kidney transplant, leading to the patient’s death. CASE TYPE: Consumer Protection/Medical Negligence Case Name: Dr. (Mrs.) Chanda Rani Akhouri & Ors. vs. Dr. M.A. Methusethupathi &

Supreme Court Dismisses Medical Negligence Claim in Kidney Transplant Case: Chanda Rani Akhouri vs. M.A. Methusethupathi (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Surveyor’s Report in Insurance Claim Dispute: Khatema Fibres Ltd. vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. (28 September 2021)

/ Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 21, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Deficiency in Service, Hemant Gupta, Insurance Act, 1938 with Section 64UM, Insurance Claim, Insurance Law, Judges, Surveyor's Report, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Surveyor’s Report in Insurance Claim Dispute: Khatema Fibres Ltd. vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the assessment of loss by a surveyor appointed under Section 64UM of the Insurance Act, 1938 is final and binding on the insured and the insurer, and the extent to which a Consumer

Supreme Court Upholds Surveyor’s Report in Insurance Claim Dispute: Khatema Fibres Ltd. vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. (28 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Refund for Delayed Villa: Marvel Omega Builders vs. Shrihari Gokhale (2019)

/ Breach of contract, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 23, Consumer Rights, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clauses 5(a) and (b), Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Orders Refund for Delayed Villa: Marvel Omega Builders vs. Shrihari Gokhale (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a consumer is entitled to a refund with interest for a delayed real estate project. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Marvel Omega Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. vs. Shrihari Gokhale and Anr. [Judgment Date]: July 30, 2019

Supreme Court Orders Refund for Delayed Villa: Marvel Omega Builders vs. Shrihari Gokhale (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top